In 60 Minutes/ 2nd talk
S.D. Muni said: “I wrote a book in 1983 named SARC, with on “A” because then the Association was not yet formed. Two years later when SAARC was formed, they handed us a depoliticized SAARC. They didn’t realize that Marx stands upside down in South Asia.” “Politicize SAARC.”

The Afghan-French author of The Patience Stone Atiq Rahimi wrote: “…in Iran just as well as in Afghanistan (and perhaps South Asia) words defy tyranny… the existential problem isn’t “to be or not to be …” but to say or not to say… Thus, any act becomes political. Even silence. Even lies… The problem lies in each of us, because our hearts are sealed… So should we still doubt the political dimension of literature? I’d say NO, because literature is a fight against all political systems. It is the power of words against the words of power.”

One of the panelists from East Asia made an interesting observation about South Asia, which I find equally applicable in the Afghan context: “South Asian dynamics are marked by a domination of politics over economics, while East Asian dynamics are marked by a domination of economics over politics. For example the India-Pakistan political tensions block building understanding on the way forward on economic development, while the China-Taiwan relations reflect the domination of economics on politics.” One entity that I think is a victim of this dynamic is SAFMA, the South Asian Media Federation, mainly because one of the panelists proposed to have a South Asian Media Summit while SAFMA exists and this makes me question SAFMA’s effectiveness. I just think this is worth a long pause, and I’d leave it at that.

The same East Asian Panelist also highlighted the need to look at deepening South Asian Integration through increased Global Integration; increased engagement with the global economy. So should national integration to be also looked at from the prism of regional economic integration then?